Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to site content

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

OLD CITY OF YORK LANDFILL
SEVEN VALLEYS, YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA


SUMMARY

The Old City of York Landfill National Priority List (NPL) site is adjacent to South Road, approximately two miles southeast of the borough of Seven Valleys in Springfield Township, York County, Pennsylvania. Site soils, groundwater, springs, seeps, and collection vaults were contaminated with volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds. Site soils, groundwater, springs, and collection vaults also contained pesticides. In addition, site soils and a seep contained PCBs. Hanover Junction lies about one half-mile west of the site, and Seitzville lies one quarter-mile south of the site. Hanover Junction has an estimated population of 50, and Seitzville has an estimated population of 20. Nine homes border the site along South Road. Nearby residents were concerned about potential exposure to site contaminants through their well water. As a result of public concern, seven houses adjacent to the site, along South Road, were connected to public water through the Seven Valleys municipal water authority. There are several potential environmental pathways associated with the site that could ultimately lead to human exposure. They are through contaminated groundwater and soil. Human exposure could occur through ingestion or dermal absorption of site contaminants from the aforementioned media. The population at potential risk includes children, hunters, hikers, or others trespassers on the site who may come into direct contact with contaminated site soils. However, environmental media associated with this site appear minimally affected by the landfill. The site represents no apparent public health hazard because there is no evidence of trespassing on the site, and because nearby residents have been provided municipal water.

Although exposure probably has occurred in the past, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's Health Activities Recommendation Panel (HARP) determined that this site should not be considered at this time for follow-up health activities because exposures did not occur at levels of public health concern, and because the duration of past exposure is unknown. Furthermore, there are no known current site-related completed exposure pathways. EPA will conduct sampling and analysis of private residential wells near the site for those homes not connected to municipal water to determine if groundwater migrating from the site is effecting those wells. The sampling will be conducted during site remediation.


BACKGROUND

A. SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

The Old City of York Landfill is a National Priorities List (NPL) site in Springfield Township, York County, Pennsylvania. The site is adjacent to South Road, approximately 10 miles south of the city of York (Appendix A). The site lies entirely on the southwest side of South Road which follows the crest of a surface drainage basin divide. The site occupies undulating hill and valley topography with the land sloping downward to the South Branch of the Codorus Creek. Springs and seeps emanate in the valleys and emerge into the Codorus Creek. In the northern portion of the site, two springs flow west and emerge at the northwestern corner of the property into one stream that continues downhill to the Codorus Creek. To the northwest and outside the perimeter of the property, a third spring also discharges into the Codorus Creek. Along the southern portion of the site, two seeps flow to the south and converge with a stream that flows west to the Codorus Creek. The site covers 178 acres, of which 56 acres are landfilled. The soil cover thickness ranges from one to three feet. Refuse lies beneath the soil ranging up to 45 feet in depth in the landfill. Beneath the refuse is undisturbed overburden or bedrock. Additional site features include an east and west leachate seep, a two-well recovery pumping system tied into an air stripper, and eight 1000-gallon sedimentation collection vaults that discharge into a seepage Exiting ATSDR Website bed via a concrete diversion box. The diversion box is about 250 feet south of the west seep. In addition, there are several drainage ways originating on site, which channel to the surface waters of the Codorus Creek (1).

The landfill operated from 1961 until 1975. Over the course of its active life, the site was a repository for trash from the city of York. From its start until 1968, the landfill was operated by the city. Thereafter, the facility was operated by firms that received the refuse contract from the city. The landfill was closed in 1975, and the site was sold to its present owner, Dr. Roger Boser, a veterinarian, in 1978. Complaints by nearby residents began in 1980, after the landfill had been closed for approximately five years. The site is now mainly used for pasture and recreation by its owner; however, a small northern section of the site is leased out to grow crops for animal consumption. Grasses and coniferous trees cover much of the former landfill. Thick briars and primarily deciduous trees grow along the drainage channels that run toward the Codorus Creek.

A series of engineering and environmental investigations were performed to evaluate and remedy the immediate effects of the landfill on domestic drinking water supplies in the area.

In 1973, in order to obtain a permit for the continued operation of the landfill, Buchart-Horn developed an engineering plan concerning site-related leachate. In 1981, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (DER) conducted residential well testing in order to determine site-related contamination. In 1982, C.S. Davidson, Inc., recommended the extension of a public water line from Seven Valleys to supply nearby residents with potable water. Also in 1982, Ecology and Environment, under U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contract, evaluated the landfill for inclusion on a list of priority hazardous waste sites. The Old City of York site was proposed for listing on the NPL in December 1982. The site was listed on the final NPL in September 1983. In 1983, NUS Corporation, under EPA contract, reported low concentrations of organic compounds in well water, and both organic and inorganic compounds were detected in soils and leachate from the landfill. Again in 1983, EPA continued residential well testing due to public concern, and placed the Old City of York Landfill on the NPL. In 1984, Groundwater Technology, Inc., (GTI) conducted an environmental assessment of the landfill, describing the hydrogeology of the site and the quality of the groundwater. In 1986, seven residents began receiving public water from the Seven Valleys municipal water system. In 1989, GTI conducted a Remedial Investigation and Risk Assessment. This public health assessment is being performed in connection with a forthcoming Record of Decision.

EPA signed a Record of Decision for the site on September 30, 1991. The selected remedy for the site includes:

  • Restoration of the soil cover in the northeastern portion of the refuse Area #3 to a two foot minimum.


  • Operation of a ground water recovery/treatment system in both refuse Areas #1 and #3 and the installation of additional extraction wells in these areas, if needed.


  • Removal of sediment from the concrete collection vaults with subsequent disposal at an offsite permitted treatment, storage, or disposal facility.


  • Installation of a landfill gas venting system to prevent landfill gas migration.


  • Contruction of a perimeter fence at the leachate collection vaults to prevent public access.


  • Implementation of a ground water and surface water/sediment monitoring program to ensure continued protection of human health and the environment.

For the purpose of this public health assessment, the site is bounded on the northeast by South Road and on the southwest by the South Branch of Codorus Creek. Gullies with unnamed intermittent drainage bound the site on the northwest and southwest. Those site boundaries will later be used in the Environmental Contaminations and Other Hazards section of this public health assessment for the consideration of on- and off-site contamination.

B. SITE VISIT

On August 29, 1990, a site visit was conducted by members of the Pennsylvania Department of Health's Health Assessment Team and by personnel from DER, ATSDR, and EPA. Contacts were established with representatives of de maximus, Inc., and a Hydrogeologist with GTI, Inc. Areas of special interest included the leachate seeps, site drainage, sedimentation collection vaults, monitoring wells, an air stripper, and the general condition of the landfill cover (Appendix B). During the site visit, we discussed the significance of the areas of special interest that could impact public health.

The day of the site visit, discolored soil and sediment provided visual evidence of contamination. Soils and sediments were notably discolored at the east and west seeps. Soils were also discolored around the sedimentation collection vaults providing visual evidence that the vaults had overflowed and affected surrounding soils. The air stripper was observed from a nearby residence; however, it had not been commissioned into service, it and was not operating. It was sunny the day of the site visit, and the temperature was about 80 degrees Fahrenheit. There were no noticeable breezes or evidence of off-site migration of fugitive dust. Most of the perimeter of the site was highly vegetated. The areas of interest could not be reached without cutting through the thick vegetation.

At the time of the site visit, the site was not undergoing remediation; however, previous site closure activities were evident in that there was visual evidence the site was capped with soil. Grasses and trees covered most of the site. Access to the site was not restricted or otherwise limited; however, there was no evidence of trespassing in the areas of interest, possibly due to the dense vegetation.

Evidence of possible human activities at the site included a short path which had been cut through the vegetation along the site's perimeter, and a slightly vegetated path through the central area of the site. Horse hoof prints were observed in the soil along the slightly vegetated path, which originated at a nearby residence.

In general, the site was observed to be hilly, grass-covered pasture lands, with the visible environmental transport route being through leachate seeps and their subsequent transport via surface water into the Codorus Creek.

In April 1991, the Pennsylvania Department of Health (PADOH) contacted the site's EPA Remedial Project Manager (RPM) to determine if any changes in site conditions have occurred since the August 1990, site visit. According to the RPM, no appreciable changes have occurred at the site since August 1990.

C. DEMOGRAPHICS, LAND USE, AND NATURAL RESOURCE USE

The site is in a rural area, and surrounding land consists primarily of farmland and woodland. Land use has remained consistent throughout the lifetime of the landfill. The owner of the former landfill resides on site along the eastern boundary. Adjacent to the site are nine residences Surrounding areas have remained rural. Hanover Junction is one half-mile west of the site and Seitzville lies approximately one quarter-mile south of the site. Hanover Junction has an estimated population of 50, and Seitzville has an estimated population of 20.

The site occupies portions of three surface drainage basins that direct local surface water runoff, generally toward the south, southwest and west. The drainage basins affect the amount and direction of surface water runoff and soil erosion in the area, thereby potentially influencing the transport and dispersion of surface contaminants throughout the site. Surface water flows are intermittent in the upper portions, but may change to perennial flows in the lower portion of each basin. All surface runoff from the site eventually enters the South Branch of the Codorus Creek which borders a portion of the site on the southwest. The Codorus Creek flows in a northwesterly direction toward Hanover Junction. In a drainage basin northeast of the site, an unnamed tributary flows toward the northwest. This tributary does not receive surface water runoff from the landfill. Most of the ground water movement beneath the site is to the west/southwest, and ultimately discharges into the Codorus Creek. Both the Codorus Creek and the unnamed tributary are capable of supporting fish, and could be used for recreational purposes.

D. STATE AND LOCAL HEALTH DATA

With the exception of mortality data, which is presented and discussed in the Public Health Implications Section, the PADOH is unaware of the existence of health records, studies, or other relevant health outcome data bases associated with this site.


COMMUNITY HEALTH CONCERNS

During operation of the landfill, a group of concerned citizens called Habitants Against Landfill Toxicants (HALT) was concerned that the water supply of local aquifers, which was their source of potable water, might have been affected by the site. They were anxious to see those aquifers protected and restored. Currently, PADOH is unaware of organized citizens' action groups or of widespread public health concern related to this site.

A notice appeared in The York Daily Record informing the public of the availability of the public health assessment for the Old City of York Landfill site for public comment. During the 30-day public comment period, ending March 20, 1992, no public comments were received by the PADOH.


ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION AND OTHER HAZARDS

The tables in this section list contaminants of concern. However, their listing does not imply that a health threat exists. This public health assessment evaluates these contaminants in subsequent sections, and determines if exposure to them has public health significance. PADOH selected these contaminants based upon the following factors: on- and off-site concentrations; field and laboratory data quality; sample design; comparison of site-related concentrations with background concentrations, and comparison of site-related concentrations with ATSDR health comparison values for carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic endpoints. In addition, the EPA Toxic Chemical Release Inventory data base was accessed by PADOH through the National Library of Medicine's Toxicology Data Network, and was searched for estimated annual releases of toxic chemicals into the environment from industries within a two-mile radius of the Old City of York Landfill site, to identify facilities that could contribute to the ground water and other media contamination near the site. No significant releases that would affect the quality of the groundwater or other media near the site were reported in the 1987, 1988, and 1989 data bases.

A. ON-SITE CONTAMINATION

The analytical results of on-site ambient air sampling conducted in July 1988, did not reveal the presence of any volatile organic compound (VOC) above background levels. In addition, the surface water sampling analysis did not indicate the presence of chemicals at levels of concern to public health.

Analysis of a leachate seep revealed the presence of lead at a maximum concentration of 79 µg/L. Other chemicals were detected in the seep at concentrations below their MCLs. Analysis of leachate sediments revealed the presence of Arochlor 1260 at a maximum concentration of 29 µ/L, cyanide at a maximum concentration of 11.5 µ/L, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons at a maximum concentration of 880 µg/L. Metals were also detected in leachate sediments in low concentrations.

Twelve on-site soil samples were collected in 1988 during the Remedial Investigation to determine the nature and extent of soil contamination. A summary of the analysis follows.

Table 1. On-Site Surface Soil Contaminationa (0-4")

Chemical
Maximum Concentration (mg/Kg)
Comparison Value (mg/Kg)
Trichloroethene
ND
NA
Tetrachlorethane
ND
NA
Vinyl chloride
ND
NA
PCB (Arochlor 1260)
13.0
5.0 EMEG(Chronic)

a = Results were obtained by GTI, Inc., for EPA.
NA = Not applicable.

Fourteen on-site monitoring wells were sampled in October and November 1988, during the Remedial Investigation, to determine the nature and extent of groundwater contamination. A summary of the analysis follows.

Table 2. On-Site GroundWater Contaminationa

Chemical
Residential Wells
(Max Conc- µg/L)
Monitor Wells
(Max Conc-µg/L)
Comparison Value
(µg/L)
Trichloroethene
3
8
5 MCL
Tetrachloroethene
10
14
5 MCL
Vinyl Chloride
ND
4 J
10 EMEG (Chronic)
PCB (Arochlor 1260)
ND
ND
NA

a = Results were obtained by GTI, Inc., for EPA.
NA = Not applicable.
J = Estimated value.

B. OFF-SITE CONTAMINATION

Surface water in four off-site stream locations was sampled. No compounds were detected in those samples.

One off-site residential well and four off-site monitoring wells in the vicinity of the site were sampled in October and November 1988, during the Remedial Investigation, to determine groundwater quality. The analytical results are summarized as follows.

Table 3. Off-Site GroundWater Contaminationa

Chemical
Residential Wells Max
(Conc.-µg/L)
Monitoring Wells
(Max.Conc.-µg/L)
Comparison Value
(µg/L)
Trichloroethene
ND
1.0
5 MCL
Tetrachloroethene
ND
8.0
5 MCL
Vinyl Chloride
ND
ND
NA
PCB (Arochlor 1260
ND
ND
NA

a = Results were obtained by GTI, Inc., for EPA.
ND = Not detected.
NA = Not applicable.

C. QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL

In preparing this public health assessment, PADOH relied on the information provided in the referenced documents, and assumed that adequate quality assurance and quality control measures were followed regarding chain-of-custody, laboratory procedures and data reporting. The validity of the analyses and conclusions drawn for this public health assessment are determined by the comprehensiveness and reliability of the referenced information.

D. PHYSICAL AND OTHER HAZARDS

The sedimentation collection vaults and a large crevice fed by a drainage pipe of unknown origin are physical hazards that may attract children. The vault lids can be easily opened, and during seasons when thick vegetation is present, one could unwittingly fall through the overgrowth into the drainage crevice.


PATHWAY ANALYSIS

As discussed in the Environmental Contamination and Other Hazards Section, past landfilling practices at the site have resulted in on-site and off-site environmental contamination. Environmental and human exposure pathways associated with the site are discussed in the following subsections.

A. ENVIRONMENTAL PATHWAYS (Fate and Transport)

Environmental media associated with this site appear minimally affected by the landfill. The air quality at this site is indistinguishable from background air quality. No contaminants were detected in the air at or around the site, except for trace levels of refrigerant chemicals attributable to storage of samples in a refrigerator on site during the remedial investigation.

Surface soils appear slightly affected by the landfill. Soil samples were taken at points exhibiting the most elevated soil-gas results, and were analyzed for Target Compound List compounds. Low levels of semi-volatile substances, pesticides, and PCBs were detected in a few samples.

Groundwater quality has been slightly affected by the landfill. Samples taken from monitoring wells in three areas, downgradient from areas that contain refuse, were reported to contain low levels of VOCs and Arochlor 1260. As stated in the Community Concerns Section, public water supplies have been made available to all residents adjacent to the site, although one resident chose to continue purchasing bottled water for drinking, and to use the private well as a utility water source. Springs emanating from the site function as groundwater discharge points, and, as such, restrict the movement of affected groundwater from the landfill toward those drinking water wells.

Sediment samples and surface water collected in springs, seeps, and associated streams contained low levels of VOCs, semi-volatiles, pesticides, and PCBs. However, no compounds were detected in off-site, downstream samples, indicating that surface waterways are only locally affected by the landfill.

B. HUMAN EXPOSURE PATHWAYS

On-site and nearby human populations may be exposed to site contaminants through ingestion or dermal absorption of contaminants.

Exposures to contaminants in air can occur at this site in either of two ways. The first exposure route involves the volatilization of contaminants from wastes or surface soils, and subsequent human exposure via inhalation. This is not believed to be a significant pathway due to the small number and low concentration of chemical contaminants detected in the surface soils and the extent of dilution that would occur in the ambient air. In addition, no VOCs were detected one foot above the soil. The second exposure route also involves contaminated surface soils or exposed wastes. The actions of wind on dry, fine-grained materials generates fugitive dust, which may be carried off site. This pathway is also believed to be insignificant. The site is highly vegetated, and there was no evidence of off-site migration of fugitive dust.

Direct contact with contaminated surface and subsurface soils can result in both dermal and incidental ingestion exposure. For example, hunters, hikers, and other unauthorized on-site people, along with nearby residents working outdoors, can get contaminated soil on their skin or clothing, and accidentally ingest some of this dust when eating or drinking. On-site residents, for whom contact with contaminated soils is routine, can also be exposed while in their homes. For example, much of the dust inside a home is generated immediately outside. Therefore, not only could site residents have a dermal and incidental ingestion exposure while outdoors, they could also be susceptible to similar indoor exposures. These are not believed to be significant pathways due to the small number and low concentrations of chemical contaminants in the soils, and the fact that the site is highly vegetated.

An indirect exposure route for contaminants in soil is through groundwater. Infiltrating precipitation can leach organic contaminants from surface and subsurface soils. Once the solubilized contaminants reach the groundwater, they are transported downgradient. Residential wells in the direction of groundwater flow are potential withdrawal points. Users can be exposed through both ingestion and inhalation of volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds. Because nearby residents have been provided with municipal water, this is not considered a complete pathway for human exposure.


PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATIONS

Currently, there are no known completed exposure pathways associated with this site that would effect public health. However, on- and off-site groundwater is contaminated with VOCs.

In this section, we discuss the health effects that may occur in persons who chose not to use filters or municipal water, and who are exposed to site contaminants in groundwater from their private wells. We also discuss information available from state health databases and address community concerns.

A. TOXICOLOGICAL EVALUATION

The EPA developed Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). Primary MCLs are federal drinking water standards promulgated under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Generally, an MCL for a toxic chemical represents the allowable lifetime exposure to the contaminant for a 70-kg adult who is assumed to ingest two liters of water per day. In addition to health factors, an MCL is required by law to reflect the technological and economic feasibility of removing the contaminant from the water supply. The limit set must be feasible given the best available technology and treatment techniques. MCLs are applicable at the tap where the water will be provided directly to 25 or more people or will be supplied to 15 or more service connections, but which in addition are relevant and appropriate requirements against which to evaluate groundwater quality. To evaluate health effects, either a Minimum Risk Level (MRL) for contaminants developed by ATSDR, or the Reference Dose (RfD) developed by EPA has been used. The MRL is an estimate of daily exposure to a contaminant below which non-cancer adverse health effects are unlikely to occur. The RfD is an estimate of a daily exposure (mg/kg/day) to the general public (including sensitive groups), and which is likely to be without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a life-time exposure (chronic RfD) or exposure during a limited time interval (subchronic RfD). The PADOH will consider standards and criteria developed by other organizations to determine whether or not the groundwater in the vicinity of the site is acceptable to use as a potable water supply.

Trichloroethylene (TCE)

Some residents have been exposed to TCE in well water through ingestion, inhalation and skin contact. Currently, there are no chronic MRL or RfD values available for this chemical. However, the level of this chemical detected in the residential well is not likely to cause any adverse health effects.

Animal studies have shown that ingesting or breathing levels of TCE that are higher than typical environmental levels can produce nervous system changes; liver and kidney damage; effects on the blood; tumors of the liver, kidneys, lungs and male sex organs, and possibly cancer of the tissues that form the white blood cells (leukemia). Results of a few studies in pregnant animals exposed to TCE in air or in food showed effects on unborn animals on newborn animals. At present, information is not sufficient to determine whether cancer, or the adverse effects seen in the unborn animals following exposure to TCE, could also occur in humans (3).

Occupational studies of workers exposed to TCE have not detected TCE-induced cancer, while several animal studies have shown that TCE can produce lung and liver cancer (3). From these animal studies, we estimate that residents who drank TCE-contaminated well water should not have a significant increased risk of developing cancer.

Tetrachloroethene (PCE)

Occupational studies of workers exposed to PCE have not detected chemically-induced cancer. However, animal studies have shown that ingesting or breathing PCE can produce nervous system changes; liver and kidney damage; effects on the blood; cancer of the liver, kidneys, lungs, and male sex organs. Studies also have shown effects on unborn and newborn animals; although, at present, insufficient information exists to determine whether these effects can occur in humans (2).

The dose from past exposure to PCE from ingestion of water from one residential well is not likely to cause any adverse health effects. Based upon animal studies, we estimate the residents who were exposed to PCE contaminated well water would have no apparent increased risk of developing cancer. The concentration of PCE (10 µg/l) detected in this residential well exceeds EPA's MCL of 5 µg/l, thereby rendering the use of this well, as a potable water supply, unacceptable for long-term use.

B. HEALTH OUTCOME DATA EVALUATION

Twenty years of all cause and cancer mortality data (total and eight cancer sites) were collected for Springfield Township where Old City of York Landfill is located. The 1979-1989 data were analyzed using Pennsylvania 1979-1981 mortality experience as a standard, and the 1980 Census population data for age and sex. This analysis produced no statistically significant excess mortality category for the cancer sites considered. This result suggests that there is no association between living near the Old City of York Landfill and excess cancer deaths.

C. COMMUNITY HEALTH CONCERNS EVALUATION

  1. Will nearby off-site residents be exposed to site contaminants in their private well water?
  2. Public water supplies have been made available to all residents adjacent to the site, although one resident chose to continue purchasing bottled water for drinking, and to continue using the private well as a utility water source. Springs emanating from the site function as groundwater discharge points, and, as such, restrict the movement of affected groundwater from this landfill toward these drinking water wells.


CONCLUSIONS

Based on the information reviewed for this public health assessment, the site is judged to represent no apparent public health hazard because there is no evidence of current human exposure, and no community-specific health outcome data to indicate that the site has had an adverse impact on human health.


RECOMMENDATIONS

Site Characterization Recommendation

We recommend conducting annual analysis of nearby private residential wells, for those homes not connected to municipal water, to determine if groundwater migration is affecting these wells.

Cease/Reduce Exposure Recommendations

We recommend conducting a planned remedial action at this site to prevent further off-site migration of contaminants into groundwater.

Health Activities Recommendation Panel (HARP) Recommendations

Data developed in the public health assessment for the Old City of York Landfill, York County, Pennsylvania, have been reviewed by ATSDR's Health Activities Recommendation Panel (HARP) for appropriate follow-up with respect to health activities. Although exposure probably has occurred in the past, this site is not being considered at this time for follow-up health activities because exposures did not occur at levels of public health concern, and because the duration of past exposure is unknown. Furthermore, there are no known current site-related completed exposure pathways.


PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS

Public Health Actions Planned

EPA has indicated that they plan to take the following actions related to the recommendations in the public health assessment.

EPA will conduct sampling and analysis of private residential wells near the site for those homes not connected to municipal water to determine if groundwater migrating from the site is affecting these wells. The sampling will be conducted during site remediation.


CERTIFICATION

This public health assessment was prepared by the Pennsylvania Department of Health under a cooperative agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). It is in accordance with approved methodology and procedures existing at the time the public health assessment was initiated.

Gregory V. Ulirsch
Technical Project Officer, SPS, RPB, DHAC


The Division of Health Assessment and Consultation (DHAC), ATSDR, has reviewed this public health assessment and concurs with its findings.

Division Director, DHAC, ATSDR


PREPARERS OF THE REPORT

Robert M. Stroman, R.Ph.
Pharmacist
Toxicology and Health Assessment Section
Division of Environmental Health
Pennsylvania Department of Health

Kandiah Sivarajah, Ph.D.
Director, Health Assessment Program and State Toxicologist
Toxicology and Health Assessment Section
Division of Environmental Health
Pennsylvania Department of Health


ATSDR REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE

Charles Walters
Public Health Advisor
Regional Operations
Office of the Assistant Administrator, ATSDR


ATSDR TECHNICAL PROJECT OFFICER

Gregory Ulirsch
Technical Project Officer
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Remedial Programs Branch, ATSDR


REFERENCES

  1. Groundwater Technology, Inc., 1989. Remedial Investigation and Risk Assessment Report for the Old City of York Landfill, Springfield Township, Pennsylvania. Prepared for EPA Region III by Groundwater Technology, Inc., March 8, 1989.

  2. ATSDR, Draft Toxicological Profile for Tetrachloroethene, ATSDR, U.S. Public Health Service, Atlanta, Georgia, December, 1987.

  3. ATSDR, Toxicological Profile for Trichloroethene, ATSDR, U.S. Public Health Service, Atlanta, Georgia, October, 1989.

APPENDIX A: SITE LOCATION MAP

Site Location Map
Figure 1. Site Location Map


APPENDIX B: AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST MAP

Areas of Special Interest Map
Figure 2. Areas of Special Interest Map

Table of Contents

  
 
USA.gov: The U.S. Government's Official Web PortalDepartment of Health and Human Services
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Atlanta, GA 30341
Contact CDC: 800-232-4636 / TTY: 888-232-6348

A-Z Index

  1. A
  2. B
  3. C
  4. D
  5. E
  6. F
  7. G
  8. H
  9. I
  10. J
  11. K
  12. L
  13. M
  14. N
  15. O
  16. P
  17. Q
  18. R
  19. S
  20. T
  21. U
  22. V
  23. W
  24. X
  25. Y
  26. Z
  27. #